The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

A. The access road to the “C Child Care Center and G Center” located in Yeonsu-gu Incheon Yeonsu-gu, Incheon (hereinafter “instant road”) is an infrastructure located within the “F Urban Development Project” zone, and there was no timely opening prior to the instant case.

The Yeonsu-gu Incheon City Office also temporarily passed the road of this case for the construction of a temporary use permit from the F Urban Development Project Association by February 28, 2019, which had the right to manage the road of this case, from February 28, 2019, and the road of this case does not constitute a road for which many unspecified people may freely pass. Thus, the road of this case cannot be deemed as “land” of Article 185 of the Criminal Act.

Therefore, on March 1, 2019, the act of temporarily controlling the instant roads on March 1, 2019 by the Defendant, the president of the F Urban Development Project Cooperatives, does not constitute a violation of general traffic under Article 185 of the Criminal Act.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (700,000 won of a fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) The purpose of Article 185 of the Criminal Act is to punish the general traffic obstruction under Article 185 of the Criminal Act, whose legal interest is to protect the general public’s traffic safety, and thereby to make it impossible or considerably difficult to pass through by causing damage to or infusing the land, etc., or interfering with traffic by other means. Here, “land” refers to a place of public traffic by the general public, i.e., a place of public nature where many and unspecified persons or vehicles and horses are allowed to freely pass through without limited to a specific person (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Do1376, Feb. 25, 2010). In fact, it refers to a place of public nature in which the general public is able to pass through by and without limited to a specific person (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Do1376, Feb. 25, 20